Since the first press release by Nick Clegg and David Cameron on Wednesday, it has dawned on the media that any coalition conflict in the near future is unlikely to come from these guys, and their so-called ‘love-in‘.
Tweedledum and Tweedledee; Ant and Dec; these are just some of the names to appear on the blogosphere or from the tweets of the twitterati to refer to our Prime Minister and the deputy. The BBC and ITN have taken to showing constant replays of David Cameron calling on Clegg to ‘come back‘ during one of their jokes in the back garden of number 10, and Henry McLeish, Labour’s former first minister in Scotland, even accidentally uttered the name “David Clegg”.
If you think Clegg will be Cameron’s nagging Aunty you can think again.
However that is not to say there will be no conflict within the coalition. On the same day as the press release Vince Cable was awaiting confirmation of the equal patch he will have with George Osborne as chair of the committee in charge of banks, only to find that those were not the plans at all.
Osborne’s sources were quick to brush the incident off by saying there had been some confusion on the matter, but it is clear for anyone to see why Ozzy Osborne wants his fingers on the banks, and not to share with his new pal Cable.
In spite of the fact that Osborne in the past has waxed lyrical about getting tough on the banks, and that the Libservatives have drawn up and agreed on a pledge to curb earth shattering bank bonuses, giving Cable the back seat is indicative that our new Chancellor finds dubious some of Cable’s tough plans for banks, namely the separation of high street and investment banking, and his no nonsense measures for banks’ lending requirements.
Sean O’ Grady of the Independent suspects that the honeymoon period inside the cabinet will be over by the 25th of June – the date of the emergency budget setting out a frame for public finances – when key differences in the party will come to the fore.
Cable has already agreed to back down on his plans for a mansion tax on properties worth over 2m, which would’ve saved money for those on the lower end of the tax scale, and Osborne compromised on raising inheritance tax exemption to 1m. Of those two compromises it is not difficult to see which measure could be for the purpose of softening the blow for the poorest in times of austerity, and which measure is in-built ideology.
If you want to identify where that coalition split will be, don’t look at Clegg and Cameron, who have to wear different coloured ties so we can tell them apart, it’s the economy, stupid.
by Carl Packman
You can read more of Carl’s thoughts and articles on his blog Raincoat Optimism.
you’re are right Neil, as Sunder Katwala of the Fabians said recently, the Tories have not disavowed, or tucked to bed, Thatcherism yet, they want to make it better, more palatable, more friendly. They seem to be employing something similar here, not letting go in spite of a clear voting mandate for distrust in the Tories (and all 3 major parties). I think the LibDems have got the short straw, the Cable-Osborne set up seems to demonstrate this quite neatly.
Good article. Cable looks kind of defeated by all of this. Remember- he came from the Labour party.
The whole coalition seems set up to consolidate Tory power rather than enact Lib manifesto promises. In fact the lib promises being enacted seem to be hand picked by the tories to mask their hardcore auserity measures.
This “romance” will hit the orning after, when the libs wake up to the fact they have been used and the Tories have played them for fools.
More here http://www.campsiesocialists.com